Does Preoperative Degenerative Spondylolisthesis Influence Outcome in Degenerative Lumbar Spinal Stenosis? Three-Year Results of a Swiss Prospective Multicenter Cohort Study

Functional outcomes correlate with sagittal spinal balance in degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis surgery

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (DLS) is a debilitating condition associated with poor preoperative functional status. Surgical intervention has been shown to improve functional outcomes in this population though the optimal surgical procedure remains controversial. The importance of maintaining and/or improving sagittal and pelvic spinal balance parameters has received increasing interest in the recent DLS literature. However, little is known about the radiographic parameters most associated with improved functional outcomes among patients undergoing surgery for DLS.

PURPOSE

To identify the effect of postoperative sagittal spinal alignment on functional outcome after DLS surgery.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

PATIENT SAMPLE

Two-hundred forty-three patients in the Canadian Spine Outcomes and Research Network (CSORN) prospective DLS study database.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Baseline and 1-year postoperative leg and back pain on the 10-point Numeric Rating Scale and baseline and 1-year postoperative disability on the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI).

METHODS

All enrolled study patients had a DLS diagnosis and underwent decompression in isolation or with posterolateral or interbody fusion. Global and regional radiographic alignment parameters were measured at baseline and 1-year postoperatively including sagittal vertical axis (SVA), pelvic incidence and lumbar lordosis (LL). Both univariate and multiple linear regression was used to assess for the association between radiographic parameters and patient-reported functional outcomes with adjustment for possible confounding baseline patient factors.

RESULTS

Two-hundred forty-three patients were available for analysis. Among participants, the mean age was 66 with 63% (153/243) female with the primary surgical indication of neurogenic claudication in 197/243 (81%) of patients. Worse pelvic incidence-LL mismatch was correlated with more severe disability [ODI, 0.134, p<.05), worse leg pain (0.143, p<.05) and worse back pain (0.189, p<.001) 1-year postoperatively. These associations were maintained after adjusting for age, BMI, gender, and preoperative presence of depression (ODI, R2 0.179, β, 0.25, 95% CI 0.08, 0.42, p=.004; back pain R2 0.152 (β, 0.05, 95% CI 0.022, 0.07, p<.001; leg pain score R2 0.059, β, 0.04, 95% CI 0.008, 0.07, p=.014). Likewise, reduction of LL was associated with worse disability (ODI, R2 0.168, β, 0.04, 95% CI -0.39, -0.02, p=.027) and worse back pain (R2 0.135, β, -0.04, 95% CI -0.06, -0.01, p=.007). Worsened SVA correlated with worse patient reported functional outcomes (ODI, R2 0.236, β, 0.12, 95% CI 0.05, 0.20, p=.001). Similarly, an increase (worsening) in SVA resulted in a worse NRS back pain (R2 0.136, β, 0.01, 95% CI .001, 0.02, p=.029) and worse NRS leg pain (R2 0.065, β, 0.02, 95% CI 0.002, 0.02, p=.018) scores regardless of surgery type.

CONCLUSIONS

Preoperative emphasis on regional and global spinal alignment parameters should be considered in order to optimize functional outcome in lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis treatment.

Symptomatic lumbar stenosis due to low-grade degenerative spondylolisthesis can effectively be treated with mere decompression

PURPOSE

Adding instrumented spondylodesis to decompression in symptomatic spinal stenosis with degenerative spondylolisthesis is subject of debate. The presence of spondylolisthesis due to degeneration is an indicator of severe facet joint and intervertebral disc degeneration, and this may fit increased instability of the spine. We aim to establish the incidence of degenerative spondylolisthesis in spinal stenosis surgical candidates and to evaluate the incidence of failure of decompressive surgery without concomitant spondylodesis as initial treatment.

METHODS

Medical files of all operated patients for spinal stenosis between 2007 and 2013 were evaluated. Demographic characteristics, pre-operative radiological characteristics (level of stenosis, presence, and grade of spondylolisthesis), surgical technique, incidence, and indication for reoperation were summarised, as well as the type of reoperation. Patient satisfaction was classified as 'satisfied' or 'unsatisfied' after initial and secondary surgery. The follow-up was 6 to 12 years.

RESULTS

Nine hundred thirty-four patients were included, and 253 (27%) had a spondylolisthesis. Seventeen percent of the spondylolisthesis patients receiving decompression were reoperated versus 12% of the stenosis patients (p=.059). Reoperation in the spondylolisthesis group concerned instrumented spondylodesis in 38 versus 10% in the stenosis group. The satisfaction percentage was comparable in the stenosis and the spondylolisthesis group two months after surgery (80 vs. 74%). Of the 253 spondylolisthesis patients, 1% initially received instrumented spondylodesis and 6% in a second operation.

CONCLUSION

Lumbar stenosis with and without (low-grade) degenerative spondylolisthesis can usually effectively be treated with mere decompression. Instrumented surgery in a second surgical procedure does not lead to less satisfaction with surgical outcomes.

The effect of preoperative degenerative spondylolisthesis on postoperative outcomes of degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis: A single-center cohort study protocol

BACKGROUND

Most degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis (DLSS) patients primitively received the conservative treatment to control symptoms. In order to develop an optimal surgical treatment strategy, it is very significant to understand how the degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (DS) affects the effect of decompression in the DLSS. Thus, the aim of this current study was to explore whether the concomitant DS would affect the effect of decompression alone in the patients with DLSS.

METHODS

The current study was carried out at our hospital and it was approved through our institutional review committee of General Hospital of Ningxia Medical University. During the period from January 2015 to December 2017, in our study, we identified consecutive patients who received the minimally invasive laminectomy to treat the DLSS. The inclusion criterion included radicular leg pain or neurogenic claudication with the neurological symptoms associated with DLSS syndrome, magnetic resonance imaging of the lumbar spine reveals at least 1 level of serious stenosis, the conservative treatment failed for at least 3 months, and patients agreed to provide the postoperative details. The major outcomes of this present research was Oswestry Disability Index. Secondary outcomes of this current study involved visual analog score, short form-36, surgical revision rate as well as complications.

RESULTS

We assumed that previous DS possessed a negative effect on the postoperative results of the DLSS patients.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

researchregistry5943.

Outcome of unilateral versus standard open midline approach for bilateral decompression in lumbar spinal stenosis: is "over the top" really better? A Swiss prospective multicenter cohort study

OBJECTIVE

In this retrospective analysis of a prospective multicenter cohort study, the authors assessed which surgical approach, 1) the unilateral laminotomy with bilateral spinal canal decompression (ULBD; also called "over the top") or 2) the standard open bilateral decompression (SOBD), achieves better clinical outcomes in the long-term follow-up. The optimal surgical approach (ULBD vs SOBD) to treat lumbar spinal stenosis remains controversial.

METHODS

The main outcomes of this study were changes in a spinal stenosis measure (SSM) symptoms score, SSM function score, and quality of life (sum score of the 3-level version of the EQ-5D tool [EQ-5D-3L]) over time. These outcome parameters were measured at baseline and at 12-, 24-, and 36-month follow-ups. To obtain an unbiased result on the effect of ULBD compared to SOBD the authors used matching techniques relying on propensity scores. The latter were calculated based on a logistic regression model including relevant confounders. Additional outcomes of interest were raw changes in main outcomes and in the Roland and Morris Disability Questionnaire from baseline to 12, 24, and 36 months.

RESULTS

For this study, 277 patients met the inclusion criteria. One hundred forty-nine patients were treated by ULBD, and 128 were treated by SOBD. After propensity score matching, 128 patients were left in each group. In the matched cohort, the mean (95% CI) estimated differences between ULBD and SOBD for change in SSM symptoms score from baseline to 12 months were -0.04 (-0.25 to 0.17), to 24 months -0.07 (-0.29 to 0.15), and to 36 months -0.04 (-0.28 to 0.21). For change in SSM function score, the estimated differences from baseline to 12 months were 0.06 (-0.08 to 0.21), to 24 months 0.08 (-0.07 to 0.22), and to 36 months 0.01 (-0.16 to 0.17). Differences in changes between groups in EQ-5D-3L sum scores were estimated to be -0.32 (-4.04 to 3.40), -0.89 (-4.76 to 2.98), and -2.71 (-7.16 to 1.74) from baseline to 12, 24, and 36 months, respectively. None of the group differences between ULBD and SOBD were statistically significant.

CONCLUSIONS

Both surgical techniques, ULBD and SOBD, may provide effective treatment options for DLSS patients. The authors further determined that the patient outcome results for the technically more challenging ULBD seem not to be superior to those for the SOBD even after 3 years of follow-up.

Does Concomitant Degenerative Spondylolisthesis Influence the Outcome of Decompression Alone in Degenerative Lumbar Spinal Stenosis? A Meta-Analysis of Comparative Studies

OBJECTIVE

To investigate whether the preoperative presence of degenerative spondylolisthesis (DS) worsens the outcome of patients undergoing decompression alone for degenerative lumbar stenosis.

METHODS

We conducted a comprehensive search in the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases. All comparative studies were included in this meta-analysis. The literature search, data extraction, and quality assessment were conducted by 2 independent reviewers. The functional outcomes were clinical scores and reoperation rate. The radiologic outcomes were slippage rate and postoperative instability rate.

RESULTS

A total of 11 studies with 1081 cases, including 469 cases of degenerative lumbar stenosis with DS (DS group) and 612 degenerative lumbar stenosis without spondylolisthesis (noDS group), were enrolled in our meta-analysis. There were no significant differences between the 2 groups for functional outcomes in terms of Japanese Orthopedic Association score, Japanese Orthopedic Association recovery rate, Oswestry Disability Index score, visual analog scale back/leg, and reoperation rate after decompression alone. For the radiologic outcomes, slippage rate was found not changed significantly before and after minimally invasive decompression alone in the DS group and the postoperative instability rate did not differ significantly between the 2 groups after decompression alone by a minimally invasive method.

CONCLUSIONS

Our meta-analysis revealed that concomitant DS (Meyerding grade I-II) does not influence the outcome of decompression alone in degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis, especially when a minimally invasive procedure was performed and patients did not have predominant symptoms of mechanical back pain. The presence of DS should not be an indication for fusion surgery in degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis.